>It is not question who started it and who has to stop it. I was talking about inapropriate magnitude of destruction. Do you actually believe that this is comparable ?
>
>Well in that case, how about this hypotetical offer ?
>Say, they return hostages tmrw, and violence stops right away.
>
>Lebanon state pays all damage Hesbollah did.
>Israel state has to pay all the damage Israel military did.
>Scope: Last 30 days.
>
>For each dead or disabled person each side pays additional 10.000.000 USD
>to their families.
>
>Sounds fair right ?
>Wld you accept it - Yes or No ?



Doesn't work that way. Look I'm not Israeli, nor I'm privy to private information. What I see is that Lebanon has a demiocratically elected government. They chose not to disarm and expel terrorists in their midst, which are wise enopugh to hide between a civilian population, therefore guaranteeing that any retaliation for their acts will catch innocent people.

Lebanon's Government (i.e. the people as it is a democracy), didi not deal with their own terrorists, or ask for assistance if they couldn't do it themselves. Remember that UN Resolution 1559 stated that Israel would leave (which they did) and Lebabon would disarm and control Hezbollah (which they did not). If they could not comply with UN Resolution because of their own governmental or military weakness, they should have asked for UN troops to be stationed along the border since that resolution and take care of the problem (and the cost) of disarming them.

Israel has the right to defend their existence and their people and fight against terrorism. If Lebanon (and Syria) were interested in stopping terrorism they would have done it already.